Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2012 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 29/02/2012, NoOp <> wrote:
There is a web page which describes manual testing: Clearly,
there are insufficient testers...

IMPORTANT: Obsoleted by Litmus

Litmus is a useful tool for organizing manual tests. Please, help us to
migrate all these test cases there and remove them from this wiki page.

So why even point 'users' to that page?

The initial purpose is to promote the existence of QA testing, both in
terms of the history (the wiki) and the future (litmus).

Cool. Have you *actually* installed 3.5.1rc1 (as noted in the litmus test)?
Description:  Test run for *3.5.1 RC* regression testing. Please use
*3.5.1 RC* build to test the cases in this run.

No, there are no new features of personal interest.

If you did (and you'd need to find it someplace other than: and (currently) only
you'd find that the install (at least on a debian linux system) smokes
your existing 3.5.0 install (remember 3.5.0 is the released version).

I don't fully understand, but perhaps this is a serious bug?

So, while I (we?) appreciate your efforts to get users on this "user"
list as pre-release testers, I'd be overly cautious about asking "users"
on this list to perform litmus tests... At least not without explaining
in *detail* what is required, and how to avoid existing LO standard
installations being blown away by a pre-release version.

That is valid and is of such high importance to be published on the
'qa' web page!

IMO it's probably better for 'users' on this list to wait to
test/participate when
actually shows a pre-release version. *And* testers understand the
implications of testing. This will avoid the "LO blew up my thesis" and
wiped out all of my exisiting templates/files/settings. (Note: I'm not
making light of those that do report such, but instead trying to avoid
such reports here in the first place as they are *serious* issues & can
happen if you don't understand what you are doing when you "test".)

True, but surely users are sufficiently intelligent to understand not
to use alpha, beta, pre-release, release candidate, etc. on computers
containing important information such as a thesis???

Any competent tester should have a separate machine.

For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.